Skip to content


  • Open Access

Complete genome sequence of Olsenella uli type strain (VPI D76D-27CT)

  • 1,
  • 3,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 6,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2, 3,
  • 3,
  • 3,
  • 3,
  • 3,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 4,
  • 4,
  • 2, 5,
  • 2, 5,
  • 2, 5,
  • 2, 5,
  • 6,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2, 7,
  • 4,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 1 and
  • 2
Standards in Genomic Sciences20103:3010076

  • Published:


Olsenella uli (Olsen et al. 1991) Dewhirst et al. 2001 is the type species of the genus Olsenella, which belongs to the actinobacterial family Coriobacteriaceae. The species is of interest because it is frequently isolated from dental plaque in periodontitis patients and can cause primary endodontic infection. The species is a Gram-positive, non-motile and non-sporulating bacterium. The strain described in this study was isolated from human gingival crevices. This is the first completed sequence of the genus Olsenella and the fifth sequence from a member of the family Coriobacteriaceae. The 2,051,896 bp long genome with its 1,795 protein-coding and 55 RNA genes is a part of the Genomic Encyclopedia of Bacteria and Archaea project.


  • microaerotolerant anaerobe
  • human gingival crevices
  • primary endodontic infections
  • Coriobacteriaceae
  • GEBA


Strain VPI D76D-27CT (= DSM 7084 = ATCC 49627 = JCM 12494) is the type strain of the species Olsenella uli, which is the type species of the genus Olsenella [1]. Currently, Olsenella is one out of thirteen genera in the family Coriobacteriaceae [24]. This strain was first described in 1991 by Olsen as ‘Lactobacillus uli’ [1]. Based on 16S rRNA gene sequence divergence and the presence of unique phenotypic characters, the strain was transferred to the new genus Olsenella as O. uli. A second novel species, O. profusa was also described [5]. More recently, a third species, ‘O. umbonata’, was described but is not yet validly published [6].The genus is named in honor of Ingar Olsen, a contemporary Norwegian microbiologist, who first described ‘L. uli’. The species epithet ‘uli’ means ‘of the gum’. Periradicular diseases are arguably among the most common human inflammatory diseases [7], which are often the result of microbial infection of the root canal [8]. Olsenella species, particularly O. uli, are common members of the microbiota associated with primary endodontic infection. O. uli has been found to predominate over other Gram-positive rods, (e.g., Atopobium parvulum) [9] in root canal samples taken after chemomechanical preparation and intracanal medication, suggesting that this species can resist intracanal disinfection measures and thus may be involved in persistent infections [10,11]. Here we present a summary classification and a set of features for O. uli VPI D76D-27CT, together with the description of the complete genomic sequencing and annotation.

Classification and features

Strains from the genus Olsenella are found in human oral cavity and likely in bovine rumen [1]. Strain VPI D76D-27CT was isolated from either human gingival crevices or periodontal pockets [1]. The 16S rRNA gene sequence of VPI D76D-27CT is 97% identical to the cultivable strains N13-17 (AY880046) and S13-10 (AY880047). These strains were isolated from a 63-year old male patient with oral squamous-cell carcinoma [12]. Two other uncultured clone sequences with 100% 16S rRNA gene sequence identity to strain VPI D76D-27CT were reported at the Genbank database (status July 2010) [13]. These were clone OPEN_ROOT_17 (FJ982973), isolated from human root canal, and clone BS34 (AY244985) from cow rumen. The 16S rRNA gene of strain VPI D76D-27CT shares 96.7-96.8% sequence identity with the sequences of the type strains from the other members of the genus Olsenella [14], whereas the other type strains from the family Coriobacteriaceae share 87.3 to 96.7% sequence identity [14]. No phylotypes from environmental screenings or genomic surveys could be linked to the species O. uli or to the genus Olsenella, indicating a rather rare occurrence of these in the habitats screened thus far (as of July 2010).

The cells of strain VPI D76D-27CT are nonmotile (Table 1), Gram-positive rods that occur singly, in pairs, and in short chains (Figure 1) [1]. The central part of the cell may swell; particularly when grown on solid medium. Strain VPI D76D-27CT is microaerotolerant to anaerobic [6] with an optimal growth temperature is 37°C [1]. Colonies on brain heart blood agar are one to two mm in diameter, raised or low convex, entire, and translucent to transparent after five days of anaerobic incubation at 37°C [1]. The cells are unable to grow on media with 6.5% w/v of NaCl. Growth is stimulated by Tween 80 (0.02% v/v). Strain VPI D76D-27CT is able to ferment glycogen, trehalose and starch. Fermentation products from glucose are lactic, acetic, formic and occasionally trace amounts of succinic acid. Lactic acid is a major product of the strain VPI D76D-27CT [1], a feature which was suspected to be important in inflammatory processes of endodontic infections [1,19]. There is little or no gas detected in agar deeps during cell growth. Hydrogen and indole are not produced. Reactions are negative for bile-esculin, DNase and hippurate hydrolysis. This strain does not ferment amygdalin, erythriol, esculin, glycerol, inositol, mannitol, melezitose, melibiose, raffinose, rhamnose, sorbitol and xylose. Acid is produced from fructose, glucose, maltose, mannose, salicin, and sucrose [1]. Strain VPI D76D-27CT does not liquefy gelatin, does not digest meat, does not produce indole, and does not reduce nitrate [1]. It is negative for bile-esculin, DNase, hippurate hydrolysis and catalase activity. However, strain VPI D76D-27CT hydrolyses esculin and produces ammonia from arginine [1].
Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Scanning electron micrograph of O. uli VPI D76D-27CT

Table 1.

Classification and general features of O. uli VPI D76D-27CT according to the MIGS recommendations [15].




Evidence code


Current classification

Domain Bacteria

TAS [16]


Phylum Actinobacteria

TAS [17]


Class Actinobacteria

TAS [3,4]


Subclass Coriobacteridae

TAS [3,4]


Order Coriobacteriales

TAS [3,4]


Suborder Coriobacterineae

TAS [3,18]


Family Coriobacteriaceae

TAS [3,4]


Genus Olsenella

TAS [1,5]


Type strain VPI D76D-27C

TAS [1,5]


Gram stain


TAS [1]


Cell shape

small-elliptical rod that occur singly, in pairs or short chains

TAS [1]




TAS [1]




TAS [1]


Temperature range




Optimum temperature





< 6.5% NaCl

TAS [1]


Oxygen requirement

microaerotolerant anaerobic

TAS [6]


Carbon source


TAS [1]


Energy source


TAS [1]



human gingival crevices

TAS [1,5]


Biotic relationship





primary endodontic infections

TAS [11,19,20]


Biosafety level


TAS [21]



plaque from human gingival crevices

TAS [1]


Geographic location

not reported



Sample collection time

1987 or before

TAS [1,5]



not reported




not reported




not reported




not reported


Evidence codes - IDA: Inferred from Direct Assay (first time in publication); TAS: Traceable Author Statement (i.e., a direct report exists in the literature); NAS: Non-traceable Author Statement (i.e., not directly observed for the living, isolated sample, but based on a generally accepted property for the species, or anecdotal evidence). These evidence codes are from of the Gene Ontology project [22]. If the evidence code is IDA, then the property was directly observed by one of the authors or an expert mentioned in the acknowledgements.


Strain VPI D76D-27CT possesses a peptidoglycan type of A4ß based on L-Orn-D-Asp [23]. The major cellular fatty acids of strain VPI D76D-27CT (FAME: fatty acid methyl ester; DMA: dimethylacetyl), when grown in peptone-yeast extract-glucose-Tween 80 broth, are C18:1 cis9 (32.1%, FAME), C18:1 (19.9%, DMA), C10:0 (10.1%, FAME), C17:1 cis8 (6.9%, FAME), C18:1 c11/t9/t6 (5.3%, FAME), C16:1 cis9 (4.8%, FAME), C16:0 (4.0%, DMA), C18:1 cis11 (3.6%, DMA), C14:0 (3.1%, FAME), C16:0 (2.8%, FAME) and C12:0 (2.6%, FAME) [1]. More recent data show a somewhat different fatty acid pattern, which is characterized by a large proportion of unbranched fatty acids (C18:0, 31–50%) and a quite large proportion of polyunsaturated fatty acids (C18:2 cis-9, cis-12; 5.6–8.4%). Presumably, this difference may be attributed to the different growth medium, which is described to be M2 liquid medium containing clarified rumen fluid [6].

Figure 2 shows the phylogenetic neighborhood of O. uli VPI D76D-27CT in a 16S rRNA based tree. The sequence of the unique 16S rRNA gene is identical with the previously published sequence generated from ATCC 49627 (AF292373).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Phylogenetic tree highlighting the position of O. uli VPI D76D-27CT relative to the type strains within the genus and the type strains of the other genera within the family Coriobacteriaceae. The trees were inferred from 1,408 aligned characters [24,25] of the 16S rRNA gene sequence under the maximum likelihood criterion [26] and as far as possible (note: Olsenella is paraphyletic in this tree) rooted in accordance with the current taxonomy [27]. The branches are scaled in terms of the expected number of substitutions per site. Numbers above branches are support values from 250 bootstrap replicates [28] if larger than 60%. Lineages with type strain genome sequencing projects registered in GOLD [29] are shown in blue, published genomes in bold [30,31]. Adding the 16S rRNA sequence of the type strain of the not yet validly published species ‘Olsenella umbonata’ (FN178463) to the tree (data not shown) did not change the overall arrangement; ‘O. umbonata’ appeared within the grade between O. uli and O. profusa.

Genome sequencing and annotation

Genome project history

This organism was selected for sequencing on the basis of its phylogenetic position [32], and is part of the Genomic Encyclopedia of Bacteria and Archaea project [33]. The genome project is deposited in the Genome OnLine Database [29] and the complete genome sequence is deposited in GenBank. Sequencing, finishing and annotation were performed by the DOE Joint Genome Institute (JGI). A summary of the project information is shown in Table 2.
Table 2.

Genome sequencing project information





Finishing quality



Libraries used

Three genomic libraries: one 454 standard and one 454 10 kb pyrosequence library; one Illumina library


Sequencing platforms

454 GS Titanium, Illumina GAii


Sequencing coverage

90.5× pyrosequence, 211.8× Illumina



Newbler version 2.0.1-PreRelease-03-30-2009-gcc-3.4.6-threads, phrap, Velvet


Gene calling method

Prodigal 1.4, GenePRIMP





Genbank Date of Release

August 6, 2010





NCBI project ID



Database: IMG-GEBA



Source material identifier

DSM 7084


Project relevance

Tree of Life, GEBA

Growth conditions and DNA isolation

O. uli VPI D76D-27CT, DSM 3776, was grown in medium 104 (PYG modified medium) [34] at 37°C under strictly anaerobic conditions. DNA was isolated from 0.5–1 g of cell paste using MasterPure Gram Positive DNA Purification Kit (Epicentre MGP04100) following the standard protocol as recommended by the manufacturer, with modification st/LALM for cell lysis as described in [33].

Genome sequencing and assembly

The genome of O. uli was sequenced using a combination of Illumina and 454 technologies. An Illumina GAii shotgun library with reads of 434,617,748 bp, a 454 Titanium draft library with average read length of 302 +/− 162.3 bp bases, and a paired end 454 library with average insert size of 9.273 +/− 2.318 kb were generated. All general aspects of library construction and sequencing can be found at Illumina sequencing data was assembled with VELVET, and the consensus sequences were shredded into 1.5 kb overlapped fake reads and assembled together with the 454 data. Draft assemblies were based on 2.0 Mb 454 draft data, and 454 paired end data. Newbler parameters are -consed -a 50 -l 350 -g -m -ml 20. The initial Newbler assembly contained 149 contigs in 1 scaffold. We converted the initial 454 assembly into a phrap assembly by making fake reads from the consensus, collecting the read pairs in the 454 paired end library. The Phred/Phrap/Consed software package ( was used for sequence assembly and quality assessment [35] in the following finishing process. After the shotgun stage, reads were assembled with parallel phrap (High Performance Software, LLC). Possible mis-assemblies were corrected with gapResolution (, Dupfinisher [35], or sequencing cloned bridging PCR fragments with subcloning or transposon bombing (Epicentre Biotechnologies, Madison, WI). Gaps between contigs were closed by editing in Consed, by PCR and by Bubble PCR primer walks (J.-F. Chang, unpublished). A total of 394 additional Sanger reactions were necessary to close gaps and to raise the quality of the finished sequence. Illumina reads were also used to improve the final consensus quality using an in-house developed tool (the Polisher [36],). The error rate of the final genome sequence is less than 1 in 100,000.

Genome annotation

Genes were identified using Prodigal [37] as part of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory genome annotation pipeline, followed by a round of manual curation using the JGI GenePRIMP pipeline [38]. The predicted CDSs were translated and used to search the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) nonredundant database, UniProt, TIGRFam, Pfam, PRIAM, KEGG, COG, and InterPro databases. Additional gene prediction analysis and functional annotation was performed within the Integrated Microbial Genomes - Expert Review (IMG-ER) platform [39].

Genome properties

The genome consists of a 2,051,896 bp long chromosome with a 64.7% GC content (Table 3 and Figure 3). Of the 1,850 genes predicted, 1,795 were protein-coding genes, and 55 RNAs; fifty six pseudogenes were also identified. The majority of the protein-coding genes (75.9%) were assigned a putative function while the remaining ones were annotated as hypothetical proteins. The distribution of genes into COGs functional categories is presented in Table 4.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Graphical circular map of the genome. From outside to the center: Genes on forward strand (color by COG categories), Genes on reverse strand (color by COG categories), RNA genes (tRNAs green, rRNAs red, other RNAs black), GC content, GC skew.

Table 3.

Genome Statistics



% of Total

Genome size (bp)



DNA coding region (bp)



DNA G+C content (bp)



Number of replicons



Extrachromosomal elements



Total genes



RNA genes



rRNA operons



Protein-coding genes



Pseudo genes



Genes with function prediction



Genes in paralog clusters



Genes assigned to COGs



Genes assigned Pfam domains



Genes with signal peptides



Genes with transmembrane helices



CRISPR repeats


Table 4.

Number of genes associated with the general COG functional categories








Translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis




RNA processing and modification








Replication, recombination and repair




Chromatin structure and dynamics




Cell cycle control, cell division, chromosome partitioning




Nuclear structure




Defense mechanisms




Signal transduction mechanisms




Cell wall/membrane/envelope biogenesis




Cell motility








Extracellular structures




Intracellular trafficking, secretion, and vesicular transport




Posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones




Energy production and conversion




Carbohydrate transport and metabolism




Amino acid transport and metabolism




Nucleotide transport and metabolism




Coenzyme transport and metabolism




Lipid transport and metabolism




Inorganic ion transport and metabolism




Secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism




General function prediction only




Function unknown




Not in COGs



We would like to gratefully acknowledge the help of Gabriele Gehrich-Schröter to growing O. uli and Susanne Schneider for DNA extraction and quality analysis (both at DSMZ). This work was performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, and by the University of California, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory under contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC52-07NA27344, and Los Alamos National Laboratory under contract No. DE-AC02-06NA25396, UT-Battelle and Oak Ridge National Laboratory under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725, as well as German Research Foundation (DFG) INST 599/1-2 and Thailand Research Fund Royal Golden Jubilee Ph.D. Program No. PHD/0019/2548′ for MY.

Authors’ Affiliations

DSMZ - German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany
DOE Joint Genome Institute, Walnut Creek, California, USA
Bioscience Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
Biological Data Management and Technology Center, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA
HZI - Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research, Braunschweig, Germany
University of California Davis Genome Center, Davis, California, USA


  1. Olsen I, Johnson JL, Moore LV, Moore WE. Lactobacillus uli sp. nov. and Lactobacillus rimae sp. nov. from the human gingival crevice and emended descriptions of Lactobacillus minutus and Streptococcus parvulus. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1991; 41:261–266. PubMed doi:10.1099/00207713-41-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Euzeby JP. List of Bacterial Names with Standing in Nomenclature: a folder available on the Internet. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997; 47:590–592. PubMed doi:10.1099/00207713-47-2-590View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Stackebrandt E, Rainey FA, Ward-Rainey NL. Proposal for a new hierarchic classification system, Actinobacteria classis nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997; 47:479–491. doi:10.1099/002 07713-47-2-479View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Zhi XY, Li WJ, Stackebrandt E. An update of the structure and 16S rRNA gene sequence-based definition of higher ranks of the class Actinobacteria, with the proposal of two new suborders and four new families and emended descriptions of the existing higher taxa. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:589–608. PubMed doi:10.1099/ijs.0.65780-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dewhirst FE, Paster BJ, Tzellas N, Coleman B, Downes J, Spratt DA, Wade WG. Characterization of novel human oral isolates and cloned 16S rDNA sequences that fall in the family Coriobacteriaceae: description of Olsenella gen. nov., reclassification of Lactobacillus uli as Olsenella uli comb. nov. and description of Olsenella profusa sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001; 51:1797–1804. PubMedView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kraatz M, Wallace RJ, Svensson L. Olsenella umbonata sp. nov., a microaerotolerant anaerobic lactic acid bacterium from the sheep rumen and pig jejunum, and emended descriptions of Olsenella, Olsenella uli and Olsenella profusa. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol (In press).Google Scholar
  7. Figdor D. Microbial aetiology of endodontic treatment failure and pathogenic properties of selected species. Aust Endod J 2004; 30:11–14. PubMed doi:10.1111/j.1747-4477.2004.tb00159.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Siqueira JF, Jr. Endodontic infections: concepts, paradigms, and perspectives. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002; 94:281–293. PubMed doi:10.1067/moe.2002.126163View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Copeland A, Sikorski J, Lapidus A, Nolan M, Rio TGD, Lucas S, Chen F, Tice H, Pitluck S, Cheng JF, et al. Complete genome sequence of Atopobium parvulum type strain type strain (IPP 1246T). Stand Genomic Sci 2009; 1:166–173. doi:10.4056/sigs.29547PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Rôças IN, Siqueira JF, Jr. Identification of bacteria enduring endodontic treatment procedures by a combined reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and reverse-capture checkerboard approach. J Endod 2010; 36:45–52. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.joen.2009.10.022View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Siqueira JF, Jr., Rocas IN. Uncultivated phylotypes and newly named species associated with primary and persistent endodontic infections. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43:3314–3319. PubMed doi:10.1128/JCM.43.7.3314-3319.2005PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hooper SJ, Crean SJ, Lewis MA, Spratt DA, Wade WG, Wilson MJ. Viable bacteria present within oral squamous cell carcinoma tissue. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44:1719–1725. PubMed doi:10.1128/JCM.44.5.1719-1725.2006PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Lipman DJ, Ostell J, Sayers EW. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 2009; 37:D26–D31. PubMed doi:10.1093/nar/gkn723PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chun J, Lee JH, Jung Y, Kim M, Kim S, Kim BK, Lim YW. EzTaxon: a web-based tool for the identification of prokaryotes based on 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequences. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007; 57:2259–2261. PubMed doi:10.1099/ijs.0.64915-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Field D, Garrity G, Gray T, Morrison N, Selengut J, Sterk P, Tatusova T, Thomson N, Allen MJ, Angiuoli SV, et al. The minimum information about a genome sequence (MIGS) specification. Nat Biotechnol 2008; 26:541–547. PubMed doi:10.1038/nbt1360PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990; 87:4576–4579. PubMed doi:10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Garrity GM, Holt JG. The Road Map to the Manual. In: Garrity GM, Boone DR, Castenholz RW (eds), Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition, Volume 1, Springer, New York, 2001, p. 119–169.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn T. Taxonomic outline of the Procaryotes. In: Garrity GM, Bell JA, Lilburn TG (eds), Taxonomic Outline of the Procaryotes, Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Second Edition. Release 4.0, Fourth Edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003, p. 1–39.Google Scholar
  19. Chávez de Paz LE, Molander A, Dahlen G. Grampositive rods prevailing in teeth with apical periodontitis undergoing root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2004; 37:579–587. PubMed doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00845.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Rôças IN, Siqueira JF, Jr. Detection of novel oral species and phylotypes in symptomatic endodontic infections including abscesses. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2005; 250:279–285. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.femsle.2005.07.017View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Classification of bacteria and archaea in risk groups. TRBA 466.
  22. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, Eppig JT, et al. Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat Genet 2000; 25:25–29. PubMed doi:10.1038/75556PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. DSMZ Catalogue of Strains. (2001), Seventh Edition.Google Scholar
  24. Castresana J. Selection of conserved blocks from multiple alignments for their use in phylogenetic analysis. Mol Biol Evol 2000; 17:540–552. PubMedView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lee C, Grasso C, Sharlow MF. Multiple sequence alignment using partial order graphs. Bioinformatics 2002; 18:452–464. PubMed doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/18.3.452View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont J. A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML Web servers. Syst Biol 2008; 57:758–771. PubMed doi:10.1080/10635150802429642View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Yarza P, Richter M, Peplies J, Euzeby J, Amann R, Schleifer KH, Ludwig W, Glöckner FO, Rosselló-Móra R. The All-Species Living Tree project: A 16S rRNA-based phylogenetic tree of all sequenced type strains. Syst Appl Microbiol 2008; 31:241–250. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.syapm.2008.07.001View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Pattengale ND, Alipour M, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Moret BME, Stamatakis A. How many bootstrap replicates are necessary? Lect Notes Comput Sci 2009; 5541:184–200. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02008-713View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Liolios K, Chen IM, Mavromatis K, Tavernarakis N, Hugenholtz P, Markowitz VM, Kyrpides NC. The Genomes On Line Database (GOLD) in 2009: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata. Nucleic Acids Res 2009; 38:D346–D354. PubMed doi:10.1093/nar/gkp848PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Saunders E, Pukall R, Abt B, Lapidus A, Glavina Del Rio T, Copeland A, Tice H, Cheng JF, Lucas S, Chen F, et al. Complete genome sequence of Eggerthella lenta type strain (VPI 0255T). Stand Genomic Sci 2009; 1:174–182. doi:10.4056/sigs.33592PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Mavromatis K, Pukall R, Rohde C, Chen F, Sims D, Brettin T, Kuske C, Detter JC, Han C, Lapidus A, et al. Complete genome sequence of Cryptobacterium curtum type strain (12-3T). Stand Genomic Sci 2009; 1:93–100. doi:10.4056/sigs.12260View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Klenk HP, Goeker M. En route to a genome-based classification of Archaea and Bacteria? Syst Appl Microbiol 2010; 33:175–182. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.syapm.2010.03.003View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Wu D, Hugenholtz P, Mavromatis K, Pukall R, Dalin E, Ivanova NN, Kunin V, Goodwin L, Wu M, Tindall BJ, et al. A phylogeny-driven genomic encyclopaedia of Bacteria and Archaea. Nature 2009; 462:1056–1060. PubMed doi:10.1038/nature08656PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. List of growth media used at DSMZ:
  35. Sims D, Brettin T, Detter JC, Han C, Lapidus A, Copeland A, Glavina Del Rio T, Nolan M, Chen F, Lucas S, et al. Complete genome sequence of Kytococcus sedentarius type strain (541T). Stand Genomic Sci 2009; 1:12–20. doi:10.4056/sigs.761PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Lapidus A, LaButti K, Foster B, Lowry S, Trong S, Goltsman E. POLISHER: An effective tool for using ultra short reads in microbial genome assembly and finishing. AGBT, Marco Island, FL, 2008.Google Scholar
  37. Hyatt D, Chen GL, Locascio PF, Land ML, Larimer FW, Hauser LJ. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 2010; 11:119. PubMed doi:10.1186/1471-2105-11-119PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Pati A, Ivanova NN, Mikhailova N, Ovchinnikova G, Hooper SD, Lykidis A, Kyrpides NC. Gene-PRIMP: a gene prediction improvement pipeline for prokaryotic genomes. Nat Methods 2010; 7:455–457. PubMed doi:10.1038/nmeth.1457View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Markowitz VM, Ivanova NN, Chen IMA, Chu K, Kyrpides NC. IMG ER: a system for microbial genome annotation expert review and curation. Bioinformatics 2009; 25:2271–2278. PubMed doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp393View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar


© The Author(s) 2010